Common Object Request Broker Architecture Avatar
  1. OMG Specification

Common Object Request Broker Architecture — All Issues

  • Acronym: CORBA
  • Issues Count: 142
  • Description: All Issues
Closed All
All Issues

Issues Summary

Key Issue Reported Fixed Disposition Status
CORBA22-142 union typecode CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-141 CDR encoding of TypeCode names inconsistent with equal operation CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-133 marshalling service context CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-132 Alignment and offsets in the presence of fragmentation CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-131 Changes to and strategy for 1.2 CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-107 Type ids in OBJECT_FORWARD return message CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-111 Use of dynamic ports CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-110 CORBA::Object::non_existent CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-109 Correct IIOP marshalling of union TypeCodes CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-108 LOCATION_FORWARD byte alignment CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-140 Typos in PIDL to C++ mappings CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-139 Typo in C++ mapping CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-138 C mapping for list_initial_services is incorrect CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-137 Defintion of Any CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-136 Any extractor signature problem CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-135 Missing Any inserter CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-134 IIOP object pointer resetting CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-128 Additional enumeration to the ReplyStatusType CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-127 Additional Requirement for GIOP 1.2 CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-126 Clarification on IIOP2.1 12.3.2 fixed point type representation needed CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-130 Section 12.7.2 type IIOP::ProfileBody_1_0 not compatible CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-129 IIOP marshalling of empty strings CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-115 Problem with GIOP CancelRequest when fragments are used CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-114 Transport Level Bridge CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-119 IDL Type Extensions: wstring CDR encoding issue CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-118 IDL Type Extensions: wchar and wstring CDR encoding CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-123 1.0 backward compat (2) CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-122 1.0 backward compat (1) CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-113 IORs and identifying Object Keys CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-112 Callbacks in IIOP CPP 1.0b1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-121 Fragment improvements (2) CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-120 Fragment improvements (1) CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-117 Type extensions char code set negotiation CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-116 Type Extensions and code set negotiation CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-125 Issue with service context CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-124 CloseConnection messages CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-96 union typecode (02) CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-95 locally constrained CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-94 IDL types are ambiguous with inheritance CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-100 Question about typecode creation CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-99 #pragma processing CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-106 CORBA::Contained::describe() underspecified CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-98 Ambiguity in non_existent() specification CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-97 Appendix B lists incorrect CORBA Components IDs CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-103 Trader constraint language and international characters CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-102 defined_in member of ModuleDescription for top-level module CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-101 Inheritance of Exceptions CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-93 RIDs CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-92 Containers CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-105 Incorrect definition of "object type" CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-104 Resetting #pragma prefix? CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-91 Proposed IFR exceptions CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-90 TypedefDef issue CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-89 CORBA 2.1 IR Structdef typo CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-85 Issue with ObjectId_to_string and string_to_ObjectId CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-84 Bug in the 2.1.spec for IDL unions CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-83 Figure 2-2 in CORBA 2.0 and CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-82 Octet and enum constants CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-81 Non ASCII alphabetics in IDL identifiers CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-80 Native types with respect to typecodes, DII, DSI,Interface Reposit. CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-79 TypeCode equality CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-88 Minor bug in 2.1 spec CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-87 Inheriting exceptions in IDL CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-86 Inclusion of standard exception CORBA 2.1 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-75 Syntax for basic types must be updated CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-74 create_exception() is declared outside any interface scope CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-73 TCKind enum should be updated CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-78 Do identifiers and keywords clash if they differ in case? CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-77 Section 3.7.2: take new IDL type extensions into account CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-76 Section 7.8: editorial CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-70 sec 17.7.1: IDL for interface request doesn"t match C++ mapping CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-69 Sequence parameter specified is ignored CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-68 request() should be added to IDL (section 17.13.2) CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Closed; No Change closed
CORBA22-67 Section 16.7: only C++ mapping defines string_free and string_dup CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Closed; No Change closed
CORBA22-72 No defined value for OBJECT_NIL CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-71 Section 7.2: get_implementation function CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Closed; No Change closed
CORBA22-64 "service"~~operation or interface? CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-63 What exactly is a request CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-61 Scope and use of prefix pragma in IDL-style repository IDs CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-60 Terminology consistency CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-52 6.6.4 Pragma Directives for RepositoryId Para 1 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-51 6.6.1 OMG IDL Format Paragraph 5 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-56 6.7.2 TypeCode Constants Last Paragraph - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-55 6.7.1 The Type Code Interface Paragraph 4 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-59 Enums and enumerators CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-58 Internationalization CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-54 6.7.1 The TypeCode Interface All Paragraphs - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-53 6.7 TypeCodes Paragraph 3 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-66 limited-length strings CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-65 Question about IDL grammar CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-57 CORE spec reference CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-62 inherit vs. include CORBA 2.0 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-50 6.5.22 InterfaceDef Paragraphs 7 and 8 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-49 6.5.22 InterfaceDef Paragraph 6 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-48 6.5.20 AttributeDef Paragraph 2 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-38 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 6 - editorial CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-37 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 5 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-36 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 2 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-35 6.5.3 Contained Paragraph 10 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-43 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 15 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-42 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 12 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-46 6.5.10 StructDef Last paragraph - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-45 6.5.8 ConstantDef Interface Paragraph 2 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-40 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 10 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-39 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 8 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-44 6.5.6 Repository Paragraph 4 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-47 6.5.11 UnionDef Last Paragraph - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-41 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 11 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-34 6.5.3 Contained - Paragraph 7 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-33 6.5.3 Contained Paragraph 2 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-32 6.5.2 IRObject Paragraph 3 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-22 4.6 Context Object Operations, Para 2 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-21 4.2.2 add_arg Paragraph 5-comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-24 4.6.2 set_on_value Paragraph 2 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-23 4.3.1 sen3 - comment 23 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-28 4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 5 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-27 4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 4 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-26 4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 2 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-25 4.6.3 set_values CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-18 4.1.1 Common Data Structures, Paragraph 6, comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-17 Interface for managing interceptors is missing CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-31 6.4.3 Interface Objects Paragraph 3 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-30 4.6.7 delete Paragraph 4 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-20 4.2.1 create_request Paragraph 8 - comment CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-19 4.1.3 Return Status and Exceptions CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-29 4.6.5 delete_values Paragraph 3 - objection CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-4 Do typecodes need literal constant representations in all mappings? CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-3 Missing info about the semantics of ORB_init and OA_init CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-14 Similar structure to IR::Identifier CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-13 Pseudo-IDL identifiers differ by case only CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-8 Typecodes for recursive sequences CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-7 lookup() questions CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-10 DSI and oneway operations CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-9 ServerRequest::op_def() CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-6 Interface Repository Error Handling CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-5 CORBA::InterfaceDef name collision CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-12 Apparent error in CORBA 2.0 Interoperability CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-11 Repository IDs CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-16 Portability and the #include directive CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-15 Recursive sequence TypeCodes CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-2 IFR: union elements associated with case labels CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed
CORBA22-1 Inheritance of describe_contents() CORBA 1.2 CORBA 2.2 Resolved closed

Issues Descriptions

union typecode

  • Legacy Issue Number: 811
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: 1. The label value corresponding to a default label should be
    designated explicitly either as an ignored field whose size equals the
    size for the discriminator type, as some value that does not coincide
    with another label value, as reserverd for future use, or as absent
    (Table 12-2 and page 12-16, "encoding the tk_union Default Case" of
    IIOP 2.1).

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 23 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 21:34 GMT

CDR encoding of TypeCode names inconsistent with equal operation

  • Legacy Issue Number: 719
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Should the TypeCode equal operation compare the results of name() to determine TypeCode equality? Same question for member_name()

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 10 Sep 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Duplicate of issue 665

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 21:34 GMT

marshalling service context

  • Legacy Issue Number: 905
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The question is: What is the exact marshalling for an encapsulation
    of a zero length sequence? (Service context is an encapsulation of a
    sequence. CORBA 2.1, Section 10.6.7, page 10-22.)
    While it may or may not be an ambiguity,
    it does appear that ORB vendors differ in their interpretations, so
    it might be important to clarify it.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 14 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed, no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Alignment and offsets in the presence of fragmentation

  • Legacy Issue Number: 904
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Its not clear to me how octet indices used for alignment and for
    TypeCode indirection offsets are calculated in the presence of
    fragmentation. Different interpretations will prevent successful
    interoperablity when fragmentation is used. IIOP 1.2 should clarify how alignment and TypeCode indirection work in the presence of fragmentation.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 13 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with revision

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Changes to and strategy for 1.2

  • Legacy Issue Number: 886
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There are 2 changes:
    1. add the request id to message fragments so that fragmentation is usable.
    2. change the alignment rules so that message headers may be changed
    without having to remarshal the body.
    [ as an aside we"d really like to remove all the alignment rules so that
    any"s no longer have to be double marshaled, but we don"t think its
    possible to deal with all the details quickly ]
    3. Add some more addressing information to request, locate_request,etc.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 8 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Type ids in OBJECT_FORWARD return message

  • Legacy Issue Number: 74
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: When a GIOP "LocateRequest" message is sent to a location service and it replies with OBJECT_FORWARD, can the IOR have a type_id equal to simply CORBA::Object rather than the true type id?

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Closed with revised text

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Use of dynamic ports

  • Legacy Issue Number: 382
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Static port # should not be mandated-unworkable.It would be nice if a "standard" IIOP port # was registered with IANA

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Mon, 2 Dec 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

CORBA::Object::non_existent

  • Legacy Issue Number: 126
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: section 7.2.5 names it "non_existent", while section 12.4.1 says that the GIOP protocol version is "_nonexistent".

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Correct IIOP marshalling of union TypeCodes

  • Legacy Issue Number: 89
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is a problem with marshalling of union TypeCodes where multiple discriminant values select the same arm of the union.

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Thu, 22 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with revised text

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

LOCATION_FORWARD byte alignment

  • Legacy Issue Number: 77
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: It would be good if the request body of a LOCATION_FORWARD reply always started on an 8 byte boundary.

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with revision from issue 901, 902

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Typos in PIDL to C++ mappings

  • Legacy Issue Number: 804
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: I think that there is a pervasive Typo in Appendix A of chapter 18.
    A number of the PIDL classes include a member function _duplicate.
    It should be declared as a static member function
    with an argument; i.e. the pointer to be "duplicated".

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 4 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Typo in C++ mapping

  • Legacy Issue Number: 732
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: C++ mapping in CORBA 2.1 has a typo in the array mapping (section 18.15 page 18-33).Same typo appears in orbos/97-05-15 in section 16.12 page 16-33. It would be nice to actually show the C++ definitions for the types F, V, and M. Find details in corresponding file

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 25 Sep 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in CORBA 2.2 editing process

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

C mapping for list_initial_services is incorrect

  • Legacy Issue Number: 621
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 14.29: The C mapping for list_initial_services is incorrect and should return a pointer to a sequence (example in corresponding archive file)

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in CORBA 2.2 editing process

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Defintion of Any

  • Legacy Issue Number: 147
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The definition of Any in C.3 is missing the no_copy flag in the class Any::from_string.

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Tue, 1 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in CORBA 2.2 editing process

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Any extractor signature problem

  • Legacy Issue Number: 146
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Should the Any extractor signature be (Any_ptr &) instead of (Any &)?

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Tue, 1 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in CORBA 2.2 editing process

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Missing Any inserter

  • Legacy Issue Number: 145
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The following inserter is missing in the C++ spec: void operation <<=(Any &, Any *); // non-copying

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Tue, 1 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in CORBA 2.2 editing process

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IIOP object pointer resetting

  • Legacy Issue Number: 55
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Some IIOP implementations set the object pointers to nil object pointers, while others set them to nil pointers.

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Tue, 16 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed, no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Additional enumeration to the ReplyStatusType

  • Legacy Issue Number: 807
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Add an additional enumeration to the ReplyStatusType (and
    LocationStatusType) called LOCATION_FORWARD_PERM (and
    OBJECT_FORWARD_PERM) that acts like the current LOCATION_FORWARD (and
    OBJECT_FORWARD), but can be used as a hint by the client that it should
    permanently discard the original IOR and replace it with the new IOR.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 10 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Additional Requirement for GIOP 1.2

  • Legacy Issue Number: 798
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: I"d like to suggest that for GIOP 1.2 that we add an additional requirement
    that an eight byte alignment occur before the body of any message.
    This allows for numerous optimizations that currently cannot be performed
    because the alignment of the beginning of the bodies is not consistent.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Mon, 22 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Clarification on IIOP2.1 12.3.2 fixed point type representation needed

  • Legacy Issue Number: 782
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: In CORBA /IIOP 2.1, 12.3.2 OMG IDL Constructed Types, Fixed-Point Decimal Type Section it is unclear to me that where is the decimal point in the IDL Fixed Type Representation (Figure 12-3), how the scale information is represented in the format

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Fri, 7 Nov 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close with no change: The scale information is in the IDL definition of the fixed-point type

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 12.7.2 type IIOP::ProfileBody_1_0 not compatible

  • Legacy Issue Number: 885
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 12.7.2 defines the type IIOP::ProfileBody_1_0, which is
    supposed to be compatible with the type ProfileBody of earlier
    versions of CORBA. Unfortunately, it has a different repository
    ID, leading to incompatibilities.
    Proposed change: Add two pragmas to section 12.7.2, inside
    the module IIOP

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IIOP marshalling of empty strings

  • Legacy Issue Number: 817
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Add a rule to CDR that allows an empty string to be marshaled as a four byte count of zero, followed by nothing. This change is backward compatible because a count value of zero is currently impossible.
    For a structure with five simple data members, this reduces the size of the
    TypeCode on the wire from 88 bytes to 60 bytes (32% saving).

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Mon, 1 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Problem with GIOP CancelRequest when fragments are used

  • Legacy Issue Number: 488
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Potential problem in determining whether CancelRequest message applies to the current message or a message that has already had a reply sent. Resolutions to this: (file)

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with revised text

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Transport Level Bridge

  • Legacy Issue Number: 465
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Work for transport level bridge that doesn"t need to understand full GIOP/IIOP protocol. Requirements: interoperability across network that doesn"t share commom transport protocol

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    accomodated by "NeedAddressingInfo" change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IDL Type Extensions: wstring CDR encoding issue

  • Legacy Issue Number: 586
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 4.1.2 p. 20 : Implementation needs to know whether it is byte-oriented or not, since CDR representation is different in each case. ORB expected to maintain table mapping of all codesets?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Thu, 29 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    duplicate to closed issue 1096

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IDL Type Extensions: wchar and wstring CDR encoding

  • Legacy Issue Number: 585
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 4.1 GIOP CDR Transfer Syntax: The spec should cover cases where TCS-W is byte-oriented or non-byte oriented

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Thu, 29 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    duplicate to closed issue 1096

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

1.0 backward compat (2)

  • Legacy Issue Number: 592
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Assuming a 1.1 server we must Reply using 1.o to Request sent from 1.o client. If we get request with junk revision (eg 2.2) we wil automatically send (1.1) MessageError, but connection is close

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed, accomodated by clarification of version semantics

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

1.0 backward compat (1)

  • Legacy Issue Number: 591
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: If 1.1 client sends request to 1.0 server and tis causes 1.0 MessageError msf from serverthen 1.1 client must recognize MessageErrors from 1.o servers

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    accomodated by clarification of version semantics

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IORs and identifying Object Keys

  • Legacy Issue Number: 460
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Is there a standard by which you can identify whether incoming IOR is for an object reference in our ORB or not? Opaque object key could have same encoding in another ORB...Confusion

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Thu, 5 Dec 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Callbacks in IIOP

  • Legacy Issue Number: 383
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Callbacks in IIOP are to be implemented by getting the server to connect back to client and act as a client itself. If this could be changed it would really help from firewall perspective.

  • Reported: CPP 1.0b1 — Mon, 2 Dec 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Fragment improvements (2)

  • Legacy Issue Number: 590
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: A response_expected setting should be added to a new "Fragment Header"(issue589) so that this setting may be delayed until the final fragment

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    issue closed, no change required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Fragment improvements (1)

  • Legacy Issue Number: 589
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Fragment messages should contain fragment header which contains a Request ID to associate the fragment with given request message. Frgamented request could otherwise block connection until sent.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    fixed, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Type extensions char code set negotiation

  • Legacy Issue Number: 574
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This negotiation adds 16 bytes to both request and reply messages. It"s overburdening an already obese message header scheme.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 14 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed, no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Type Extensions and code set negotiation

  • Legacy Issue Number: 573
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: page 26 of ptc/97-01-01: replace "Code set negotiation is not....." with"Code set negotiation is performed on a per-request basis."

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 14 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with no revision required

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Issue with service context

  • Legacy Issue Number: 651
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What should an ORB do when it gets a message with an unknown service context ID value?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Mon, 4 Aug 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with revision

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

CloseConnection messages

  • Legacy Issue Number: 593
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: 1.1 client may get 1.0 CloseConnection prior to first attemptto send Requests which it needs to recognize. Spec should clarify this.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 17 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed with revised text

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

union typecode (02)

  • Key: CORBA22-96
  • Legacy Issue Number: 812
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: 2. I cannot locate where the definition of typecodes for unions with
    members with multiple labels. The natural semantics with respect to
    the member accessor operations on that typecode and the CDR
    marshalling of that typecode would seem to be that the union
    declaration is treated as if the member definition in question were
    replicated once for each label.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 23 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

locally constrained

  • Key: CORBA22-95
  • Legacy Issue Number: 797
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What is the consensus for the notation to use for interfaces to objects
    that are in the orb but not outside. We use to call them psuedo objects.
    During the last talk I got the feel that there are three options:

    1. //PIDL
    2. "psuedo" keyword placed before "interface"
    3. //locally constrained

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 9 Dec 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IDL types are ambiguous with inheritance

  • Key: CORBA22-94
  • Legacy Issue Number: 783
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What is the return type of parent(), short or long? The spec does not say whether the inherited ::y::y::z takes precedence, or whether it is ::x::z. The scope resolution rules don"t mention how to resolve such an ambiguity. The spec should be updated to state that ::x::z takes precedence (IDL example in corresponding archive "issue783")

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 25 Nov 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close noting that this has been explained in Revised Chapter 3.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Question about typecode creation

  • Legacy Issue Number: 911
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Consider the following operation in the ORB pseudointerface:

    TypeCode create_union_tc (
    in RepositoryId id,
    in Identifier name,
    in TypeCode discriminator_type,
    in UnionMemberSeq members)

    Suppose that in some mapping this is invoked with the given arguments,
    i.e. an id, a name, a discriminator_type, and members..
    For concreteness, suppose that the id argument has the value
    "IDL:foo/bar:1.0".

    There are three main cases:<<Go to issue archive>>

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 21 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add clarification to section 10.6 that consistency of RepositoryIds with the IDL source or the IR i

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

#pragma processing

  • Key: CORBA22-99
  • Legacy Issue Number: 910
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: On page 7-32, the 2.1 spec says about #pragma processing:
    An IDL compiler must either interpret these annotations
    as specified, or ignore them completely.
    I don"t think this makes sense.
    If the prefix pragma isn"t honored in one ORB, but used by another ORB,
    the repository IDs will disagree for types generated from the same
    IDL definition, but with different IDL compilers. This in turn means
    that interoperability is destroyed.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Fri, 23 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    See resolution of 999 , close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

CORBA::Contained::describe() underspecified

  • Legacy Issue Number: 918
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The describe() operation of the CORBA::Contained interface of the
    Interface Repository is under-specified in CORBA 2.1. (section 7.5.3
    on page 7-12). The text should add that the "kind" field of the returned
    Description struct should give the DefinitionKind for the "most derived"
    type of the object. Without this, the spec can be read as allowing
    describe() to return a kind of dk_Typedef, or even dk_all!

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Sun, 25 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    incorporate the proposed clarification

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Ambiguity in non_existent() specification

  • Key: CORBA22-98
  • Legacy Issue Number: 903
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is a minor ambiguity here. Consider the case where the ORB cannot
    make a reliable determination because the client-side run-time cannot
    reach the implementation repository or the server. In that case, most
    ORBs will raise a TRANSIENT or COMM_FAILURE exception. I can read the
    above words in the spec to mean that a compliant implementation of
    non_existent is allowed to hide the exception from me and return false
    instead.
    I suggest to amend the wording such that non_existent is obliged to propagate
    any exception other than OBJECT_NOT_EXIST back to the caller.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 13 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Sugested text below , close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Appendix B lists incorrect CORBA Components IDs

  • Key: CORBA22-97
  • Legacy Issue Number: 884
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: 1. Appendix B lists the CORBA Component IDs. This listing is
    incorrect: Proposed resolution: Change Appendix B to correspond to the
    main text.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Proposed resolution: Change Appendix B to correspond to the

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Trader constraint language and international characters

  • Legacy Issue Number: 915
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: the trader constraint language (page 16-98, 2.1 spec) defines a
    character class "<other>". This class is used in the definition of
    what characters may appear inside a string literal (on page 16-97).
    The problem is that the definition limits the legal character values
    that may appear in a string literal. Only character positions 0x1
    to 0x7f are legal, anything else is illegal.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 21 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Replace section B.2.3 with corresponding text from the ISO Trader standard

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

defined_in member of ModuleDescription for top-level module

  • Legacy Issue Number: 913
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What is the value member of what is returned by
    CORBA::Contained::describe when invoked on a CORBA::ModuleDef object
    corresponding to a top-level IDL module?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 21 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate change in 2.3 and close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Inheritance of Exceptions

  • Legacy Issue Number: 912
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This is a request to add an optional extension to IDL which would
    permit an exception declaration to include a specification of the
    superexception or superexceptions for a given exception, exactly the
    same way superinterfaces may be specified when defining an interface.The advantage of this extension is that it (optionally) permits
    interface designers to organize exceptions into categories, which can
    help clarify the design of the exceptions.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue, resolved

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

RIDs

  • Key: CORBA22-93
  • Legacy Issue Number: 780
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The definition of IDL Repository IDs the example in the IFR chapter 7.6.6 indicates that prefixes when not set are not separated. Definition says that "typically" it is the prefix and scoped name separated with "/".

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Fri, 7 Nov 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed with sepcific example in section 10.6.5.2 in Rev 2.3

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Containers

  • Key: CORBA22-92
  • Legacy Issue Number: 779
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: On the issue of making StructDef, UnionDef, and ExceptionDef inherit from container, would it be possible to introduce the depreciation of including anything other than members in these three types?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Fri, 7 Nov 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    This issue appears to be a rehash of the essence of Issue 777 so I recommend that we close this wit

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Incorrect definition of "object type"

  • Legacy Issue Number: 917
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The definition of interface and object type in the Object Model
    are imprecise, if not incorrect. [See section 1.2.5 of the Corba 2.1
    spec (Aug 1997)]

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 27 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Clarify as follows

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Resetting #pragma prefix?

  • Legacy Issue Number: 916
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: the spec doesn"t say how I can reset a repository ID prefix back to nothing
    after I have set it. Consider

    #pragma prefix "dstc.edu.au"
    interface foo {};
    #pragam prefix "" // Attempt to reset prefix
    interface bar {};

    This doesn"t work with at least one ORB I have tried.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Mon, 26 Jan 1998 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    See resolution of issue 999 , close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Proposed IFR exceptions

  • Key: CORBA22-91
  • Legacy Issue Number: 778
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Proposed IFR exceptions raised by destroy() and move(): exception DependencyExists {}; raised by create_* and move(): exception RIDAlreadyDefined {}; exception NameALreadyDefined {};

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Fri, 7 Nov 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate changes in 2.3a and close issue.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

TypedefDef issue

  • Key: CORBA22-90
  • Legacy Issue Number: 777
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Is it legal for a TypedefDef to contain another TypedefDef that is NOT mentioned in it"s "members" attribute? If not, should the IR spec explicitly forbid this?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 30 Oct 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, issue closed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

CORBA 2.1 IR Structdef typo

  • Key: CORBA22-89
  • Legacy Issue Number: 776
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: "Read Interface" section of 7.5.10: The second sentence is a typo. The StructDef as a whole can "contain" structs, unions, and enums. However, the members attribute is a CORBA IDL data type not a subtype of Container, and hence cannot "contain" anything in the sense used elsewhere in the IR spec. The sentence should be deleted

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 30 Oct 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove the second sentence in section 8.5.10 of Rev 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Issue with ObjectId_to_string and string_to_ObjectId

  • Key: CORBA22-85
  • Legacy Issue Number: 749
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 18.4 "illegal characters": It should be clarified what corresponds to the concept of "illegal characters". On the othe hand, do we want to specify that ObjectIds generated by the POA should not include those "illegal characters?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Mon, 6 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Bug in the 2.1.spec for IDL unions

  • Key: CORBA22-84
  • Legacy Issue Number: 727
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Table 3-11 on page 3-26 shows wchar as al legal switch type for unions. The grammar on page 3-26 doesn"t have wchar as a legal switchtype. The same is true for grammar on page 3-13. Is wchar legal for union discriminator? Spec will need to be fixed

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Fri, 17 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Figure 2-2 in CORBA 2.0 and CORBA 2.1

  • Key: CORBA22-83
  • Legacy Issue Number: 726
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: In the figure all the interfaces/skeletons/adaptors/stubs have either an Up-call or a Normal-call arrow or both with the exception of the Dynamic Skeleton which has neither

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add an Up-Call Arrow to the Dynamic skeleton box.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Octet and enum constants

  • Key: CORBA22-82
  • Legacy Issue Number: 725
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: IDL should permit enum and octet constants.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    The following changes add enum and octet constants to IDL:

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Non ASCII alphabetics in IDL identifiers

  • Key: CORBA22-81
  • Legacy Issue Number: 724
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: IDL identifiers can contain non-ASCII alphabetic characters. None of the language maappings deals with this. To fix this restrict IDL identifiers to ASCII characters, digits and underscore

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Since most of the implementation languages to which IDL is mapped do not accept non-ASCII character

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Native types with respect to typecodes, DII, DSI,Interface Reposit.

  • Key: CORBA22-80
  • Legacy Issue Number: 666
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The portability spec is silent on issue of native types with respect to typecodes, DII, DSI and Interface Repository. Issue should be addressed. (see archive for details)

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Mon, 11 Aug 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Proposed resolution is to add representation of native type in the IR. Details below as proposed by

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

TypeCode equality

  • Key: CORBA22-79
  • Legacy Issue Number: 665
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: TypeCode equality is not very well-specified or portable.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Mon, 11 Aug 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate more complete specification as shown below:

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Minor bug in 2.1 spec

  • Key: CORBA22-88
  • Legacy Issue Number: 754
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The grammar mentions fixed point literals for constsnts on page 3-12. The corresponding section of the grammar on page 3-19 does not include <fixed_pt_literal> as a valid constant initializer

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Tue, 21 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    incorporate changes in 2.3 and close this issue and 1066.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Inheriting exceptions in IDL

  • Key: CORBA22-87
  • Legacy Issue Number: 753
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: When writing IDL, why is it not possible to have an exception declaration inherit from another exception? It"s possible to have an interface inherit another interface, so it seems logical to derive an exception class from an already declared exception area

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Thu, 23 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue with no change with the above explanation.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Inclusion of standard exception

  • Key: CORBA22-86
  • Legacy Issue Number: 751
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The proposal is to define a new standard exception, called
    EXTERNAL_ACCESS (the name is not important) that carries
    an any value. Another alternative may be to re-define
    the exception COMM_FAILURE so that it may carry an any in
    addition to the existing minor and completed fields.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.1 — Mon, 6 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close no change in 2.4

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Syntax for basic types must be updated

  • Key: CORBA22-75
  • Legacy Issue Number: 611
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 3.8.1: The syntax for basic types must be updated to include the adopted IDL type extensions.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

create_exception() is declared outside any interface scope

  • Key: CORBA22-74
  • Legacy Issue Number: 610
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 6.8: The create_exception() methos is declared outside any interface scope. It seems logical to move it to Container Interface along with other create_XXX() methods

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

TCKind enum should be updated

  • Key: CORBA22-73
  • Legacy Issue Number: 609
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 6.8: TCKind enum should be updated to include adopted IDL type extensions as follows: tk_longlong, tk_longdouble, tk_wstring, tk_wchar. Update DefinitionKind and PrimitiveKind enum

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close, fixed in 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Do identifiers and keywords clash if they differ in case?

  • Key: CORBA22-78
  • Legacy Issue Number: 641
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 3.2.3 and 3.2.4: It"s not said explicitly that an identifier may not differ from a keyword only in case since it differs only in case from a keyword

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 30 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in 2.2+, Close

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 3.7.2: take new IDL type extensions into account

  • Key: CORBA22-77
  • Legacy Issue Number: 624
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The section states that the <<and>> operands must be in the range 0 to 32. Should be changed to 0 to 64 to take new IDL type extensions into account

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close, Fixed in 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 7.8: editorial

  • Key: CORBA22-76
  • Legacy Issue Number: 623
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 7.8: ; is missing from definition of attribute policy_type

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close, Fixed in 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

sec 17.7.1: IDL for interface request doesn"t match C++ mapping

  • Key: CORBA22-70
  • Legacy Issue Number: 598
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The IDL for interface Request does not match the C++ mapping. There are a series od add_arg methods in the mapping that should be added to the IDL.

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Language mappings are allowed to have custom mappings for pseudo-interfaces.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Sequence parameter specified is ignored

  • Key: CORBA22-69
  • Legacy Issue Number: 597
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Why does mapping ignore the sequence parameter specified in the IDL for the initialization service and split this single parameter into 2 separate ones in the mapping?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    That is an artificat of C/C++ historical usage and is not a core issue. In general language mapping

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

request() should be added to IDL (section 17.13.2)

  • Key: CORBA22-68
  • Legacy Issue Number: 596
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The Object C++ mapping has an _request() method that is not in the IDL. This method should be added to the IDL

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Closed; No Change — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    The Object::_request operation is an artifact of the C++ mapping and not generally applicable to ot

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 16.7: only C++ mapping defines string_free and string_dup

  • Key: CORBA22-67
  • Legacy Issue Number: 595
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Only the C++ mapping defines string_free and string_dup. Why are these methods not present in other language mappings? If they are generally applicable they should be added to the IDL

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Closed; No Change — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    They are C++ language specific helper functions, that is why they are in the C++ mapping section. T

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

No defined value for OBJECT_NIL

  • Key: CORBA22-72
  • Legacy Issue Number: 607
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 7.2.3: reference is made to OBJECT_NIL but there is no defined value for this. A value must be explicitly defined and typed

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Section 7.2: get_implementation function

  • Key: CORBA22-71
  • Legacy Issue Number: 604
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Why does Object have a get_implementation function instead of a readonly implementation attribute? (likewise for get_interface)

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 9 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Closed; No Change — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed issue, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

"service"~~operation or interface?

  • Key: CORBA22-64
  • Legacy Issue Number: 570
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Does a service consist of single operation, or a collection of related operations, exceptions, types, and constants?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 20 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Cleaning up the use of the word service throughout the document does not seem to be an achievable g

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

What exactly is a request

  • Key: CORBA22-63
  • Legacy Issue Number: 569
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: One may expect it to be a reply or response.Reading chapters 1,4,5 makes clear that it is the entirety of an invocation of an operation, including request and response. Change possible soon?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 20 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Clarify the sense in which the term Request is used in section 1.2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Scope and use of prefix pragma in IDL-style repository IDs

  • Key: CORBA22-61
  • Legacy Issue Number: 567
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is confusion about effect of "prefix" pragma evident in the Interface Repository chapter. Whole notion of prefix should be explained more fully in section 6.6.1

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Mon, 12 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Clarifying language has been incorporated in section 10.6.5.2 (old section 8.6.5.2) in Rev 2.3 adeq

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Terminology consistency

  • Key: CORBA22-60
  • Legacy Issue Number: 565
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What terminology should the core settle on? Interface inheritance with use of subtype/supertype? What about immediate and transitive versions of relationships?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 20 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved closed issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.6.4 Pragma Directives for RepositoryId Para 1 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-52
  • Legacy Issue Number: 444
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Conforming compilers should ignore pragmas that are not defined. in this spec, and that they do not explicitly support. Portable applications should only use pragmas defined in this spec.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    The proposal in the summary is unreasonably restrictive, and would disallow use of other pragmas i

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.6.1 OMG IDL Format Paragraph 5 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-51
  • Legacy Issue Number: 443
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The semantics of minor version number changes should be a requirement on conforming applications (objects).

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    That"s what the sections appears to say. close issue, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.7.2 TypeCode Constants Last Paragraph - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-56
  • Legacy Issue Number: 448
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para indicates that form of TypeCode constants might be implementation specific.Does that mean the contents of the TypeCode implementation as opposed to signature of programmer?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Offending language has been removed in Revision 2.3

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.7.1 The Type Code Interface Paragraph 4 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-55
  • Legacy Issue Number: 447
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Last sentence: It"s not clear under which conditions this is permitted. It"s permitted when a structure,union,enumeration or alias typecode wasn"t obtained from Interface Repository.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in 2.2 close no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Enums and enumerators

  • Key: CORBA22-59
  • Legacy Issue Number: 545
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Sec 3.13 says enumerators don"t create a nested scope.Implication: 2 differnt enum types within same module can"t have same enumerator names. Flag following example as an error

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Thu, 10 Apr 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    issue closed, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Internationalization

  • Key: CORBA22-58
  • Legacy Issue Number: 499
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: New Idl types have been introduced to cover non-ISO code sets.Sec 5.4.1 indicates that where "generic strings" are required in a spec "wstring"should be used. Place holder in naming spec: Istring

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 12 Feb 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    not interpretable, closed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.7.1 The TypeCode Interface All Paragraphs - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-54
  • Legacy Issue Number: 446
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: PIDL for this interface describes the exceptions that might be raised, but the text doesn"t define the conditions when all of those exceptions might occur. This must be addressed.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fixed in 2.2 close no change.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.7 TypeCodes Paragraph 3 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-53
  • Legacy Issue Number: 445
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: It"s better to say "However, TypeCode "literals" shall have a representation such that they can be placed in C include files."

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Offending sentence removed in the resolution of issue 73. This is the same as issue 73

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

limited-length strings

  • Key: CORBA22-66
  • Legacy Issue Number: 588
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Limited-length strings are missing from enumeration in section 1.2.4. Were they intended to go in "Basic Types" or the "Constructed types" section?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Thu, 29 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate change in 2.3a and close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Question about IDL grammar

  • Key: CORBA22-65
  • Legacy Issue Number: 571
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Is it a mistake, in IDL grammar as given in CORBA 2.0, revised July 1996, that <octet_type> is not one of <const_type>s?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Tue, 6 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    subsumed by issue 725

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

CORE spec reference

  • Key: CORBA22-57
  • Legacy Issue Number: 459
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: CORE contains specific language binding information which should be in a language binding chapter or in a new appendix

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Such information now exists only in the way of examples of what a particular piece of pseudo-IDL me

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

inherit vs. include

  • Key: CORBA22-62
  • Legacy Issue Number: 568
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Ther is sense in which an interface "includes" operations it inherits from its base interface.Does it also "include" types, constants, and exceptions?

  • Reported: CORBA 2.0 — Wed, 21 May 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue with annotation fixed in Rev 2.2+

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.22 InterfaceDef Paragraphs 7 and 8 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-50
  • Legacy Issue Number: 442
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: These paras indicate that an error is returned if the ID already exists in the repository. What is the error and what happens of the IR supports versioning?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Superceded by 778

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.22 InterfaceDef Paragraph 6 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-49
  • Legacy Issue Number: 441
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This Para indicates that the base_interface attribute can return an error if there are name conflicts. What error is returned?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Subsumed by 778

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.20 AttributeDef Paragraph 2 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-48
  • Legacy Issue Number: 440
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What does the describe operation return for this interface?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add the sentence "The describe operation for an AttributeDef object returns an AttributeDescription

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 6 - editorial

  • Key: CORBA22-38
  • Legacy Issue Number: 427
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para starts the description of the arguments for the lookup_name operation. It should stand out more instead of being intended in such a way that it looks like part of previous item"s description.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    changed, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 5 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-37
  • Legacy Issue Number: 426
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para descibes exclude_inherited argumentto the content operation. Format is poor, it"s not clear what the default setting for this argument might be (if any).

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    no change required, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 2 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-36
  • Legacy Issue Number: 425
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: It"s not clear what lookup operation returns when it is successful. We can tell from the IDL, but it should be explicitly defined. We think it returns object reference to scoped name.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    no change required, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.3 Contained Paragraph 10 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-35
  • Legacy Issue Number: 424
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para indicates that name attribute is changed to new_name, and version attribute is changed to new_version. If name already exists and IR doesn"t support versioning=error. What error?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Subsumed by 778 . Closed with that annotation

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 15 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-43
  • Legacy Issue Number: 432
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para describes create_<type> operations. It indicates that there are errors returned under differing circumstances. Possible errors should be defined.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Superceded by 778

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 12 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-42
  • Legacy Issue Number: 431
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para refers to the describe operation. This operation is part of the parent interface from which container interface is inherited.There should be a pointer to the parent interface

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.10 StructDef Last paragraph - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-46
  • Legacy Issue Number: 438
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para indicates that the type member is ignored and that it should be set to TC_void. If it is ignored, why should it be set to anything?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove the phrase "is ignored" from the last sentence of section 8.5.9 rev 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.8 ConstantDef Interface Paragraph 2 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-45
  • Legacy Issue Number: 437
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There should be a pointer to the list of simple types.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Replace the phrase "simple type( ..... )" by the phrase "primitive types allowed in a constant decl

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 10 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-40
  • Legacy Issue Number: 429
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This para and para 4 both describe a limiy_type argument. These should be described in the same way since they appear to have the same semantics

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate resolution and close issue.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 8 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-39
  • Legacy Issue Number: 428
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What other values of levels_to_search are legal? What happens if values other than those described are used?Is an exception raised? If so, what exception?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.6 Repository Paragraph 4 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-44
  • Legacy Issue Number: 435
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This Para refers to a PrimitiveDef. There should be a pointer to where this is defined.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    In section 8.5.6 second para under Read Interface, add a cross reference to section 8.5.13 where Pr

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.11 UnionDef Last Paragraph - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-47
  • Legacy Issue Number: 439
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This Para indicates that the type member is ignored and that it should be set to TC_void. If it is ignored, why should it be set to anything?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate resolution and close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.4 Container Paragraph 11 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-41
  • Legacy Issue Number: 430
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Same as issue # 429 with respect to 6.5.4 Container Paragraph 5.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate resolution and close issue.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.3 Contained - Paragraph 7 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-34
  • Legacy Issue Number: 423
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This initial Para of the Write Interface section indicates that an error is returned if an object with specified ID attribute already exists. Error should be specified.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close with annotation as above.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.3 Contained Paragraph 2 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-33
  • Legacy Issue Number: 422
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Para indicates that IRs are not required to support simultaneous containment of multiple versions of the same named object. Required that IRs are able to handle multiple versions of objects

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.5.2 IRObject Paragraph 3 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-32
  • Legacy Issue Number: 421
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Write Interface description indicates that it is error to invoke destroy on a Repository or PrimitiveDef. Should state that behavior is undefined.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue, resolved

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6 Context Object Operations, Para 2 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-22
  • Legacy Issue Number: 399
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Spec reads " Property names are stored preserving their case, however names cannot differ simply by their case." This sentence should be deleted.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Propose to apply resolution as above and close issue in 2.3

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.2.2 add_arg Paragraph 5-comment

  • Key: CORBA22-21
  • Legacy Issue Number: 397
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: X/Open believes there is no need to use different wording. They don"t believe that it is useful to indicate that mixing of methods might be allowed someday

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    In Section 5.2.2 Para 5 Rev 2.2 remove the word "currently" from the last sentence

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.2 set_on_value Paragraph 2 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-24
  • Legacy Issue Number: 402
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Text reads:"Currently, only string values are supported by the context object." Sentence should be deleted, since PIDL requires that a string be the value provided

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Propose apply resolution to rev 2.3 and close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.3.1 sen3 - comment 23 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-23
  • Legacy Issue Number: 400
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: X/Open recommends that this para is being reworded to require that applications call get_response after a send. Spec could also be modified to detect errors if response is not required

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 5 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-28
  • Legacy Issue Number: 406
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Text reads " If the specified scope name is not found, an exception is returned." Error to be indicated must be specified. See objection for Paragraph 2.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    See resolution of 404

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 4 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-27
  • Legacy Issue Number: 405
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Text indicates that "Value scope names are implementation-specific." Items not necessary for portable development of applications are unspecified,undefined.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove paragraph 4. Does not add any value to the spec.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 2 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-26
  • Legacy Issue Number: 404
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The error to be returned must be specified.. Since a status is not required to be returned, it"s incorrect to say that error is returned. Exception is raised.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    add text to sections 5.6.4, 5.6.5 and 5.6.7 stating what exceptions are raised under what condition

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.3 set_values

  • Key: CORBA22-25
  • Legacy Issue Number: 403
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: See comment on set_value in issue # 402

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Propose apply resolution to rev 2.3 and close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.1.1 Common Data Structures, Paragraph 6, comment

  • Key: CORBA22-18
  • Legacy Issue Number: 393
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The usage of len could easily lead to a situation where it was inconsistent with TypeCode through erronous usage. WOuld be great if standard System exception was available for this case.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Close no change in 2.3a

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Interface for managing interceptors is missing

  • Key: CORBA22-17
  • Legacy Issue Number: 380
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: List of interceptors to be called during request and order in which interceptor will be called: Needs to be resolved by Alec Thomas but shouls also be moved to ORB RFT

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Mon, 18 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

6.4.3 Interface Objects Paragraph 3 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-31
  • Legacy Issue Number: 420
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Final Para describes the types of support interfaces that might be available in some implementations. These are not interesting for portable application develpoment.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    no change necessary, issue closed

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.7 delete Paragraph 4 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-30
  • Legacy Issue Number: 409
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The exception to be returned is not specified. See objection for 4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 2.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    see resolution of 404

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.2.1 create_request Paragraph 8 - comment

  • Key: CORBA22-20
  • Legacy Issue Number: 396
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This paragraph should be deleted, since it is not useful for an application programmer.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    issue closed, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.1.3 Return Status and Exceptions

  • Key: CORBA22-19
  • Legacy Issue Number: 395
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: X/Open recommends that the specification is being modified to require DII functions to return a Status as an unsigned long. Implementations without return value return value:non-conforming

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    closed issue, resolved

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

4.6.5 delete_values Paragraph 3 - objection

  • Key: CORBA22-29
  • Legacy Issue Number: 408
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This paragraph indicates that an exception is returned. See objection for 4.6.4 get_values Paragraph 2

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 26 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    see resolution of 404

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Do typecodes need literal constant representations in all mappings?

  • Key: CORBA22-4
  • Legacy Issue Number: 73
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Section 6.7 of the CORBA 2 spec constrains the representation of typecodes such that typecode "literals" can be placed in C include files. Is this meant?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    The offending paragraph, which is now the para 3 of section 10.7, seems to not clearly state anythi

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Missing info about the semantics of ORB_init and OA_init

  • Key: CORBA22-3
  • Legacy Issue Number: 68
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The text associated with ORB_init and OA_init does not specify what is done with the argv parameter that requires it to be inout.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Incorporate change in 2.3a and close issue.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Similar structure to IR::Identifier

  • Key: CORBA22-14
  • Legacy Issue Number: 283
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is no such type as IR::Identifier? It should really say CORBA::Identifier. Are ServiceTypeNames limited to characters allowed in IDL Identifier and also case sensitive?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Sat, 19 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved in 2.2

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Pseudo-IDL identifiers differ by case only

  • Key: CORBA22-13
  • Legacy Issue Number: 233
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: IDL identifiers in chapter 4 differ by case only [Ch 17 CORBA2.0] Some of the identifiers used in the IDL in Ch 4 differ only by case, which is not legal in IDL.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Mon, 14 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Typecodes for recursive sequences

  • Key: CORBA22-8
  • Legacy Issue Number: 116
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: In the interface for the create_recursive_sequence_tc ORB method, is this just a matter of creating a TypeCode with these two fields, or is there a parameter missing?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No parameter is missing. you just create a TypeCode with TCKind set to tk_sequence and content type

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

lookup() questions

  • Key: CORBA22-7
  • Legacy Issue Number: 86
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Does the lookup() function also lookup in the base interfaces if used on an InterfaceDef? If so, what if it is is more than one interface? Can the search_name argument be a scoped name?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Thu, 15 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

DSI and oneway operations

  • Key: CORBA22-10
  • Legacy Issue Number: 129
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: After calling a Dynamic Invocation Routine, how can the ORB know whether to send a response back to the client (i.e., whether the operation was "oneway")?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    The ORB uses protocol information (i.e. from GIOP response_expected) to make this decision.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

ServerRequest::op_def()

  • Key: CORBA22-9
  • Legacy Issue Number: 128
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What is the purpose of the ServerRequest::op_def method? It is not described in the Chap. 5 discussion of ServerRequest or in 18.4.1.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Interface Repository Error Handling

  • Key: CORBA22-6
  • Legacy Issue Number: 85
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The IR specification specifies what operations are an error, but does not specify how this error is returned. The specification does not define any exceptions.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Thu, 15 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Superceded by Issue 778

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

CORBA::InterfaceDef name collision

  • Key: CORBA22-5
  • Legacy Issue Number: 76
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: CORBA::InterfaceDef defines an operation "is_a", although there is already an "is_a" operation defined in CORBA::Object. Section 3.6 on page 3-17 says this is not allowed.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue, resolved

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Apparent error in CORBA 2.0 Interoperability

  • Key: CORBA22-12
  • Legacy Issue Number: 156
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: in 13.5.6 "The DCE ESIOP", "Location Policy Component" there is for module IOP a list of 4 "const octet statements.. The BNF appears to suggest that this is invalid.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 8 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    issue closed, no change

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Repository IDs

  • Key: CORBA22-11
  • Legacy Issue Number: 133
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: I would expect a lookup on IDL:/CORBA/Object:1.0 to return an InterfaceDef. It would seem more logical if Object was represented by a "default" InterfaceDef in the repository.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Portability and the #include directive

  • Key: CORBA22-16
  • Legacy Issue Number: 306
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: #include has same definition that C and C++ programmers are used to.HP treats #include at global scope as merely introducing declarations. This idea needs closer examination

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Sat, 23 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close no change in 2.4

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Recursive sequence TypeCodes

  • Key: CORBA22-15
  • Legacy Issue Number: 300
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Are they a new TypeCode kind (tk_kind) or are they of the tk_sequence TypeCode kind/

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    subsumed by issue 116, close issue.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

IFR: union elements associated with case labels

  • Key: CORBA22-2
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: A union element associated with N case labels manifests in the IFR as N distinct UnionMembers. Is this intended?

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Thu, 16 May 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    resolved, close issue

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT

Inheritance of describe_contents()

  • Key: CORBA22-1
  • Legacy Issue Number: 2
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Where does the OperationDef interface inherit the describe_contents() operation from.

  • Reported: CORBA 1.2 — Thu, 16 May 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — CORBA 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    close issue, resolved

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT